Effect of Cognitive Rehabilitation Strategies based on Eye Movement Techniques for Executive Function of Patients after Stroke
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objective:To observe the effect of cognitive rehabilitation strategies based on eye movement techniques for executive function of patients after stroke.Methods:A total of 64 patients with executive dysfunction after stroke from the Forth Rehabilitation Hospital of Shanghai were randomly divided into the control group and the observation group according to the Excel Rand function, with 32 cases in each group. Both groups were given routine treatment for cerebrovascular diseases. The control group received routine rehabilitation training included physical therapy, occupational therapy, swallowing and speech function training and cognitive function training, 20 min each item, 80 min each time, once a day, six days a week, continuous treatment for six weeks. The cognitive rehabilitation strategies based on eye movement techniques (20 min) were used in the observation group to replace the cognitive training part of the routine rehabilitation training, and the rest of the training was the same as the control group. The observation time of the two groups was 10 weeks, the 1st to 6th week was the intervention stage, and the 7th to 10th week was the follow-up stage. Before intervention, after intervention, after follow-up, the behavioral assessment of dysexecutive syndrome (BADS) and Wisconsin card sorting test (WCST) were used to assess executive function. Montreal cognitive assessment scale-Beijing version (MoCA-B) was used to assess cognitive function; reaction time was used to assess attention. Results: There was no statistical difference between the two groups in the BADS, WSCT, MoCA-B, reaction time before intervention (P> 0.05). ①Executive function: compared with before intervention, the BADS total score and WSCT subitems score (except for"completed classification number"of the control group) of the two groups were significantly improved after intervention (P< 0.05); the WSCT subitems score (except for"completed classification number"and"correct response number") of the two groups after follow-up were significantly improved (P< 0.05). Compared with after intervention, the BADS subitems score (such as RSCT, Total) and WSCT subitems score (such as"correct response number""wrong response number""learning to mastering") of the two groups after follow-up were significantly improved (P< 0.05). Compared with the control group, the BADS score and WSCT score (except for"learning to mastering") of the observation group after intervention were significantly improved (P< 0.05); the BADS subitems score (such as RSCT, TJT) and WSCT subitems score (such as"correct response number""wrong response number""persistent error number") of the observation group after follow-up were significantly improved (P< 0.05). ②Cognitive function: compared with before intervention, the MoCA-B score of the two groups after intervention were significantly increased (P< 0.05). Compared with after intervention, the MoCA-B score of the observation group after follow-up were significant decreased (P< 0.05). Compared with the control group, the MoCA-B score of the observation group after intervention were significantly improved (P< 0.05). ③Attention: compared with before intervention, the response time of the two groups after intervention and follow-up was significantly shorter (P< 0.05); compared with the after intervention, the response time of the two groups after follow-up was significantly prolonged (P< 0.05). Compared with the control group, the response time of the observation group after intervention was significantly shorter (P< 0.05).Conclusion:Cognitive rehabilitation strategies based on eye movement techniques can effectively improve cognitive function, attention and executive function of patients after stroke, which is worthy of clinical promotion and application.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».